Zen and the Art of Roster Construction

by The Cheat on Mar 27, 2007 10:51 PM CDT in News Comment 82 comments

The White Sox opening day roster is all but set

Anderson Wins Spring Competition; Will Open Season as 4th Outfielder

Entering the spring, the Sox were supposedly holding an open competition for the center field job. It quickly became apparent that was not the case as Ozzie Guillen heaped praise on Darin Erstad at every opportunity while giving him more at bats than anyone else in the Cactus League. You could argue that he just wanted to see what Erstad could do, but you'd have to ignore the copious amount of quotes about all the grinderish qualities -- known, but unquantifiable qualities -- that only Darin Erstad brought to the club.

Despite what some around here may say, Anderson says he didn't walk to the plate with enough confidence last year.

"It's not an at-bats thing with me. It's a confidence thing. There are guys out there in baseball with [bad] swings and horrible mechanics, but they are arrogant and cocky and play and produce. It's an attitude thing with me. I lost that swagger last year and I think I got that back now."

Expect the Sox to carry three lefties

If I'm reading into this Ozzie quote correctly -- and I believe that I am -- it sounds like he plans on keeping both of the Logan/Sisco big, erratic lefty tandem as the team heads north.

"We should have made the decision on the last cuts today, but I was not too happy with the way Sisco and Boone threw the ball," Guillen said. "That's what we're going to decide tomorrow. "I didn't want to make a decision because I was mad or whatever. I had [assistant general manager] Rick [Hahn] call [general manager] Kenny [Williams] and tell him that I didn't want to make the last cuts today. I want to talk to everyone tomorrow morning."

I originally assumed by reading that passage that Gavin Floyd had won a spot with Ozzie unable to decide between the two lefties, but I had simply missed the previous paragraph about Floyd being likely to open the season in Charlotte's rotation. The only other option remaining is David Aardsma, who by most accounts has had a terrible spring. He needs to be able to throw strikes more consistently, and be able to get his slider, which isn't as bad as initially advertised, over the plate. This will be Floyd and Aardsma's final option year.

Back to Wikiality

Wiki Gonzalez must not have called a very good game today. He was sent to minor league camp while Gustavo Molina appears destined to be carrying a .084 batting average in May when the Sox finally decide to look for a competent backup catcher.

At least we got that problem against lefties all nailed down.

The 2006 White Sox ranked 25th in baseball in OPS vs. LHP. And thanks to number of tough lefties within the division they just happened to have 150 more at-bats against LHP than any other team in baseball, about 400 more than the major league average. They fixed that problem by leading the league in 4th outfielders (Anderson, Podsednik, Erstad, Mackowiak, Ozuna), only one of whom can hit LHP, and none who hit for above average power. The only other spot in the lineup that is looking at a change from last year is backup catcher, which I assume we don't need to go over anymore. Hall would have been a very nice upgrade, but it appears that the Sox are looking to do the unpossible, as Ralph Wiggum would say. They've got a fighting chance to get worse production from their backup back stop this year.

0 recs | Comment 82 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

pods in, perez out: TRAVESTY!

Roster survival for Anderson meant a temporary end of the line for outfielder Luis Terrero, who was outrighted to Triple-A Charlotte after Tuesday's loss, and first baseman Eduardo Perez, who was released from his Minor League contract. Guillen praised the way Terrero played during Spring Training and continued to express his admiration for the veteran Perez.

In fact, Guillen explained how the White Sox tried to make trades to open a spot for Perez, but nothing ever materialized. Guillen also believed that Perez should look for a big-league job, with the option open of coming back to the White Sox system if nothing else works.

"Believe me, if we had any spot for him -- we tried all kinds of stuff. He knows it. We made him aware we're going to try do it -- if this thing doesn't work, this thing doesn't work. Well, nothing worked."

please kenny, kick pods...

by The Wizard on Mar 27, 2007 11:05 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree...

Mack would be a better LF/leadoff man. But since he doesn't have the mad basestealing skilz of Pods that will never happen. Really, they should have traded Mack and kept Perez. If Perez were in for Thome and the Sox had actual backup C that could hit LHP there might have been some hope in those games. At least Sabathia should have a fun opening day

by hitlesswonder on Mar 27, 2007 11:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'd bet that if...

Mackowiak wanted to, he could get picked off and caught stealing all the time too. Maybe then the Sox would like him as much as they like Podsednik.

Seriously, this is the most depressed I've been about an Opening Day roster in a while. I'm starting to think that 72-90 might not be far off the mark.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Mar 28, 2007 10:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Baseball Prospectus

"semi-revised" their O/U to 77 (77 - 85).

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=6023

Although 72 - 90 might be more on target.

It's ALL ABOUT PITCHING and DEFENSE. If the pitching looks like 2005 instead of 2006, they'll contend.

by ballyb on Mar 28, 2007 10:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

So far...

The pitching and defense has not been good. The outfield defense in particular has been pretty shoddy from what I've seen - lots of misread fly balls falling in for hits. And I don't know if Uribe's not playing at 100% or what, but he's not displaying much range this spring.

The pitching actually worries me less than the defense.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Mar 28, 2007 11:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Spring training

stats have been proven over and over again to have no relevance on the regular season. The reason BP projects the Sox so badly is because they expect our starters to be even worse than last year.

Our starters had a 4.65 ERA last year, good for 8th best in the AL. If we are worse than that then BP will be right. I just think that's extremely unlikely to happen. All of the other projection systems are much more optimisitic. They project our big 4 starters to have around a 4.25 ERA on average. If you project the 5th starter to have an ERA around 5, that brings your average to 4.40 (considering the 5th starter is likely to pitch less this is generous). That would be around 50 less runs and would have been 4th in the AL last year.

That's not even counting our bullpen. Even though we have some volatile relievers there's no way that they'll be worse than the Politte/Cotts bullpen of last year. If only because Ozzie won't stick with ineffective, non-championship relievers for very long.

I just don't see us losing 90 games anymore than I see Detroit losing 90 games. Could it happen? Sure. But it would have to be an absolute worse case scenario for almost every player.

That could happen to anybody. Even the Yankees. I mean they are starting Carl Pavano on opening day. If Wang and pettite are both out, Clemens doesn't come on board and Igawa is ineffective they're in trouble. Yes that's a lot of things that would have to happen, but that's exactly the point. If everything turns against you any team could lose 90 games. It's just extremely unlikely that everything will go wrong even if PECOTA says that it will. I'd definitely take a bet on the over even using the 77 wins. Any takers?

by bhoov on Mar 28, 2007 12:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'd take the over...

on 77 wins (although I wouldn't be totally surprised if that was what the Sox ended up with), but I'd definitely take the under on 87 wins, and I'd seriously consider taking the under on 82.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Mar 28, 2007 1:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm very interested to know...

how the Sox are going to give up more runs than the Minny pitching staff. Sorry, I just don't see it.

by Tony82087 on Mar 28, 2007 11:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Santana

by Paxson Jackson on Mar 28, 2007 11:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

That, and...

The fact that the Twins are too smart to leave guys with 6+ ERAs in the rotation all season. Guys like Ponson and Silva will be replaced by Garza, et al., by June.

Plus, the Twins have a stellar bullpen, unlike the White Sox, who have a bunch of plus arms that have no idea how to pitch.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Mar 28, 2007 11:07 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

TWINKIES

The Twins had a stellar bullpen LAST SEASON. The difference between the '05 Sox 'pen and last year's should have taught you that bullpens, even comprised of the same guys, can vary wildly in performance from year to year.

It takes two to lie; one to lie and one to listen.

by Toonderstrook on Mar 28, 2007 12:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

They still have a stellar bullpen.

Even if you think the league will catch up to Neshek, Crain and Nathan alone are better than anyone the Sox had in '05 or '06, and they've both proved their worth over multiple seasons.

I have very little confidence that anyone in the Sox bullpen can stay both healthy and effective all season long.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Mar 28, 2007 12:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

true

but other than reyes (with his ridiculous .89 ERA, over 4 runs under his career average up to last year), their main guys (nathan, rincon, crain) will probably hold up better than our guys (hermie, cotts, and politte) did. their numbers last year weren't so wildly off career averages like our's were.

the twinkies also had a stellar bullpen in 2005, 2004, 2003...see a pattern?

by larry on Mar 28, 2007 12:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Indeed.

I am just feeling a little reactionary at the doomsday attitude before we've even played one game.

It takes two to lie; one to lie and one to listen.

by Toonderstrook on Mar 28, 2007 12:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

And...

...I should have said the Chicago White Sox, not "we."

It takes two to lie; one to lie and one to listen.

by Toonderstrook on Mar 28, 2007 12:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's hard not to have a doomsday attitude.

Right now the Sox have one reliable reliever (and I think I'm being generous when I say Thornton is reliable; he's had one good season), two reliable starters (and Vazquez and Garland can really only be relied on for average production), three black holes in the lineup, no backup catcher to speak of, and nobody on the bench that can hit.

They're depending on three over-30 sluggers and a third baseman with a bad back to carry them through the season. They'll need a whole lot of luck to contend.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Mar 28, 2007 12:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

You forgot to mention

even if the Sox get better than prognosticated pitching and hitting this season, we have to hope the Central sucks.

by Paxson Jackson on Mar 28, 2007 1:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

disagree completely....

How does BP come up with it's doomsday numbers? they project the sox to allow 866 runs this year, 72 runs more than a bad '06 ! The Tampa Bay Devil Rays allowed 856 runs last year. So we are projected to have worse pitching than the Drays last year. That is NOT going to happen.

They project us to score 773, almost 100 runs less than last year and similar to the production of offensively challenged Oakland A's. The weird thing about these projections is they are from essentially the same team as last year. Garcia is the only real change. As bad as Erstad is he won't be worse than BA was last year (although I think we all agree that he'll be worse than BA will be THIS year.) Will there be some regression in the hitters? yes. but 100 runs?

The bottom line is that BP thinks we'll have the offense of the A's and the pitching of the Devil Rays. There's just no way that BOTH of those things will happen. And JRE you're just reading way too much into meaningless ST games where we rarely even have all of our starters in the game.

by bhoov on Mar 28, 2007 1:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I hear you, Toonder,

and we're all in first place right now (even the Scrubs). And I don't think I'm "piling on" with the mob in thinking we might have a more difficult year. Hell, it's like sex - baseball is good even when it's bad (though occasionally painful). However, we (I) had such hope last spring because KW worked it in the offseason, players signed below market to stay aboard, everyone was stoked for another run.

Do we (I) feel that same anticipation today for '07? Other than the traditional "you never know!" attitude that keeps even Devil Rays fans coming back for more I don't see/feel/hear it.

I hope I'm SO wrong, and hear about it all year long. I wouldn't bet that way, though.

by winningugly on Mar 28, 2007 12:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I know

That DEEPEST isn't BEST but take a look at this article.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/baseballs-deepest-starting-rotations/

I've found that The Hardball Times is pretty legitimate.

by ballyb on Mar 28, 2007 11:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, the White Sox...

Are pretty deep in starting pitching as well.

Right now, the Charlotte rotation looks like it might be Gavin Floyd-Gio Gonzalez-Charlie Haeger-Heath Phillips-Lance Broadway. They're not at the level of Garza or Perkins, but if Danks bombs out, the Sox should be able to find someone to give them decent innings.

The fifth starter doesn't worry me. It's the other four that worry me.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Mar 28, 2007 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Really?

If Danks bombs, Haeger might be able to post a 6 ERA. The other Charlotte pitchers would do worse in my opinion. The Sox AAA rotation has one real prospect in Gio Gonzalez, and he's nowhere near as good Garza, Perkins, Baker or Slowey. The Twins young pitching is just insane. I don't see any quality pitching depth in the Sox minor league system.

by hitlesswonder on Mar 28, 2007 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think Haeger's...

better than that. I know people around here detest knuckleballers for some reason, but Haeger can be a decent starter. I also think that there's no reason that Phillips couldn't be at least acceptable.

I'm not really comparing the Sox and Twins minor-league pitching, because the Twins have major-league pitching (Garza, Perkins, Baker) masquerading as minor-league pitching until they are reminded that Ortiz, Ponson and Silva are horrible. They don't count, IMO.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Mar 28, 2007 11:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Haeger

I agree he is better then that - I grew up watching Wood on some pretty bad Sox teams, as a 5th starter they are good. Lots of innings, if the defense behind them is good (hmmmm) they should post an above 500 record without burning up your bullpen. The bad thing with them is the game they are off, they are off. Also, unless you have the catcher for them, there will passed balls. (I would never want to see one come in as a reliever with guys in scoring position.)
As far as the starting rotation - Garland should be good, the other 3 worry me. (Not including Danks here) The other 3 demonstrated the same as we finished with last year, with the exception of Vasquez, which wasn't waiting till the 6th inning to get hammered.

I really don't have any expectations for them this year - I just plan on taking my son to the games and will enjoy the time spent with him. (Trying to keep the frustration to a minimal at this point - I'm finding myself getting to aggravated already)

Here's hoping its just a ST mentality that Ozzie and the team have and they will adjust when the season starts.

by Brush Back on Mar 28, 2007 11:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Five reasons.

Johan Santana.
Boof Bonser.
Matt Garza.
Kevin Slowey
Scott Baker.

In my eyes, this will be the rotation by the All-Star break. Gardenhire may have the same bizarre love for shitty "veterans" that Ozzie does, but he's not quite as hard-headed. Ponson, Ortiz, and Silva are all garbage, but I'm thinking they'll go the way of Tony Batista, Kyle Lohse, and Juan Castro.

by Dongfang Hong on Mar 28, 2007 11:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

And yeah, I think they'll keep Perkins in AAA. n/t

by Dongfang Hong on Mar 28, 2007 11:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I assume that the Sox were trying to trade...

Mackowiak to make room for Perez. Perez could have backed up 1B, DH, and possibly have made a few starts in LF. With Anderson making the team as our fourth outfielder and Ozuna also playing some outfield, Mackowiak had to be the guy they tried to deal.

by SSH2005 on Mar 27, 2007 11:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

That Mackowiak for Brady Clark rumor...

may have had some truth to it before Clark was dealt to the Dodgers. If the Sox had traded Mackowiak for Brady Clark, Clark could have been the righty CF'er to platoon with Erstad and the Sox would have probably sent Anderson to AAA to allow Eduardo Perez to make the roster. I'm not saying it would have been a good trade but it would have probably made some sense to Ozzie/Kenny.

by SSH2005 on Mar 27, 2007 11:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i think perez killed his chances

by not staying healthy. he was always going to be a tough fit. i wanted him to make the roster but, considering he looks like a china doll right now, i'm not all that concerned that he didn't. if he's having muscle trouble in arizona, i can't imagine it would get any better in chicago in april/may.

by larry on Mar 28, 2007 8:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Is it just me or has this season gone to crap...

in less than a week?

Toby Hall is likely out for the season.
Kenny seems content with Gustavo Molina as our backup catcher.
Darin Erstad is our starting center fielder.
Brian Anderson is our fourth outfielder.
Eduardo Perez was just released.

I'm not even excited to start the season at this point.

by SSH2005 on Mar 27, 2007 11:10 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

if 80% of the moves involve the bench

...we are worrying too much. Putting Erstad in the lineup is the one serious problem of the five, and that is a problem that should resolve itself with a DL stint before too long. Would you rather be the Mets, whose rotation is a shambles and who just lost Duaner Sanchez for the season? Or the Twins counting on SIDNEY PONSON with Liriano out for the year? Granted, the construction of the bench is not optimal but it is not what will make or break this season. If Mark Buehrle reverts to his 2005 form none of this will matter. (And if he throws like he did last August, none of this will matter.)

by asinwreck on Mar 28, 2007 7:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

More Garbage

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070327&content_id=1862788&vkey=spt2007news&fex t=.jsp&c_id=cws&partnered=rss_cws

the White Sox have two fleet-footed, adept handlers of the bat sitting at the top of their potent offensive attack.

You better handle the hell out of the bat if you're not going to get on base or hit for any power, and in Pods case, play adequate defense.

But the White Sox also will have two left-handed hitters working back-to-back, meaning manager Ozzie Guillen might juggle the order to avoid having a third straight left-handed hitter in Jim Thome.

Clearly, the problem is Thome. Let's trade his ass.

We could just put a right-handed hitter with an above average OBP at the top of the lineup, you know, like, maybe, Iguchi..

Judging by last year's statistics, the most effective order would have Thome hitting third, Konerko sitting fourth and Dye hitting fifth. Thome batted .292 with 34 home runs and 88 RBIs in the third spot during his first year with the White Sox, Konerko hit .303 with 28 home runs and 88 RBIs batting cleanup and Dye became an AL Most Valuable Player candidate with a .315 average, 30 home runs and 80 RBIs from the fifth slot.

This is just lazy use of statistics. The passage should more accurately read: Judging by last years most frequently used batting order... I mean what does he expect, of course their counting stats are going to be highest in the spot they spent the majority of the time last year. And don't think for a second that I'm going to buy that their spot in the batting order has any tangible effect on each players rate stats. Any fluctuation one way or the other is just noise around his true talent.

Ugh. I could go on. It just sucks that I feel so poorly about the season when it hasn't even started yet.

Now I can imagine what Gleeman felt like last year with Liriano opening in the pen, Lohse in the rotation, and the left side of the infield with immobile out-makers.

AIM: SouthSideCheat

by The Cheat on Mar 27, 2007 11:13 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Are you on the "Merkin SUCKS" bandwagon?

I've been aboard all along. Merkin is every bit as bad as that homer Carrie Muskrat is for Cubs.com. I guess these hacks get paid to make the fans feel good about their respective teams. It's all about the bottom line -- MLB profits.

by SSH2005 on Mar 27, 2007 11:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I understand his job

I don't hate him for doing it.

Sometimes I just feel the need to cancel out what he writes though.

AIM: SouthSideCheat

by The Cheat on Mar 27, 2007 11:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Absolutely dead-on

Who really listens to Merkin? Who, of anyone expecting objectivity and insight, listens to the PR department of any company?

Agree with asinwreck - we can get caught up in the minutae and miss the big picture, but I think the big picture is that we were not good enough last year and are no better, if not worse, this year. Thus, is our competition equal or better? I think the Tiggers will jettison T. Jones and immediately be a better team, and Shef is an upgrade, too. Injuns already being handed the division by the wags in SI (I don't agree, though I think they'll be better this year). So at best we again look to be 3rd (which is great for Gale Sayers but no cigar for us - if you don't get the reference, read his autobiography title).

I think KW, for whatever reason, hasn't been aggressive enough in fixing our 2006 weaknesses, as he did (or at least we thought he did) in the 2005-2006 offseason. Maybe because his moves in '05-'06 looked great but didn't bring a championship.

Will keep an open mind and heart - 2005 has bought that, and as a Sox fan I'm used to having to deal with disappointment, but I'm still hopeful this is not the team we end the year with.

by winningugly on Mar 28, 2007 8:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

While I agree and am

generally pessimistic on the season (I'm thinking 82 wins), last year we started the season thinking that we had improved the club from a year before and lost 9 wins.

Unfortunately, that mainly hedges on our pitching, which was god-awful in Arizona.

by chrome on Mar 28, 2007 1:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Pessimistic

82 wins - what did we do to improve during the off season? I'd call it being realistic. I hope we are wrong... and I would enjoy being so!

by Brush Back on Mar 28, 2007 1:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm generally addled

but weren't they teh suck in arizona in 2005? Not that there's a correlation with bad ST/Good season but that there is little correlation in good ST/good season

by dyspeptic on Mar 30, 2007 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Moving Iguchi

is just a stupid baseball decision. I don't want to go all moneyball here, but how a can a team look at the expected OBPs in the 1 and 2 slots and think that's a good idea?

My new most hated baseball cliche is "handle the bat". As far as I can tell it translates to something like "handle the bat in such a way as to not hit for power nor get on base at a reasonable rate". The fact that there are people who view Erstad as an ideal #2 hitter just boggles my mind. The fact that some of these people run the Sox is both mind-boggling and terribly unfortunate.

by hitlesswonder on Mar 27, 2007 11:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Iguchi...

So... Iguchi puts up a .342 OBP in his rookie year.
Then, he puts up a .352 OBP in his second full season. Iguchi might put up a .362 OBP in the second spot this season -- HELL, WE BETTER MOVE HIM!!! So retarded.

Ozzie's love for speedy leadoff-type guys with crappy OBP's is going to kill our team. Ozzie is turning into Dusty Baker. I used to laugh at my Cubs fan buddy when Dusty put Juan Pierre / Corey Patterson / Neifi Perez in some combination of 1-2 at the top of his lineup. Ozzie is just as bad.

by SSH2005 on Mar 27, 2007 11:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's heresy...

But I was just thinking that the 2007 Sox remind a little of the 2005 Cubs. Strong offense in the infield, lousy LF & CF and terrible OBP at the top of the order (squint and Pods/Erstad start looking Patterson/Perez/Macias...at least statistically). Plus a pitching staff counting on a couple of guys whose arms are falling off (Prior/Wood and Buehrle/Contreras).

Actually, I think the season will be better than that. And if it's not, I'll at least be interested in seeing what Williams will get at the trade deadline for the veterans that he's sure to deal.

by hitlesswonder on Mar 27, 2007 11:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

From the trib...

The Rockies expressed interest in recently optioned knuckleballer Charlie Haeger after watching him pitch three scoreless innings in a 'B' game Sunday against them.

OK, Haeger for Torrealba! Who's with me on this?

In reality, I doubt the Rox would trade their only experienced C. I hope the Sox don't trade Haeger for just a bag of balls. He's the only AAA SP I'd have some confidence in if Danks fails.

by hitlesswonder on Mar 27, 2007 11:15 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I would like Torrealba or any decent backup C...

but I ain't trading a decent 5th starter for him. Haeger has more trade value than that.

by SSH2005 on Mar 27, 2007 11:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree...

I hope the Sox feel the same way...

by hitlesswonder on Mar 27, 2007 11:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

more than likely, the Colorado GM -- I don't even know who it is. O'Dowd? -- had admired Haeger from afar for a while. And is just using the Sox sudden situation without a 2nd Catcher as an opportunity to steal him.

It's no secret that while I'm a fan of Charlie's, I don't really like the idea of a knuckleballer on my team. It's excruciatingly painful to watch. I'll continue to hope that he pitches well and that we'll be able to sell him at an inflated price to a team in need of a durable 5-6th starter

AIM: SouthSideCheat

by The Cheat on Mar 27, 2007 11:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

But I'm guessing that you wouldn't trade Haeger...

for a backup catcher like Torrealba, right?

by SSH2005 on Mar 27, 2007 11:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'd trade him -

Why the hell not? So we can have Tim Wakefield on our staff for the next 10 years breaking our hearts one start and dazzling us in another? There's a reason there aren't a lot of knuckleballers, and it's not just because it's a tough pitch to throw - it's a pain in the ass to play behind (literally - I'd never want to be the designated catcher or stay alive in the infield behind a flutterball guy).

Not in love w/ Haeger. He was supposed to compete as the 5th starter and hasn't made it. A knucksie reliever would be just as bad. If there is trade value and we can address a gaping need (and it is gaping - what if AJ gets hurt?) why not do it?

by winningugly on Mar 28, 2007 8:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Insightful, Ugly

I hadn't really thought about it, but A.J. has joined Dye as the most valuable players above replacement on the Sox.

It takes two to lie; one to lie and one to listen.

by Toonderstrook on Mar 28, 2007 8:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Somewhere "The Truth"

is laughing.

I wonder if we can insert a "No WWE" clause in AJ's contract.

by winningugly on Mar 28, 2007 12:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Colorado

doesn't exactly seem like the place where a knuckleballer would have great success.

by the wimperoo on Mar 27, 2007 11:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I was thinking the same thing

But it's hard to argue with his ability to keep the ball in the park. I suspect that's what Colorado is most impressed with. They probably would have sent him to Colorado Springs to really get an idea of what it would do at altitude before he made it to Coors.

AIM: SouthSideCheat

by The Cheat on Mar 27, 2007 11:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Why not claim Rivera?

Posted on BTF

From MIL Journal-Sentinel: Catcher [Mike] Rivera clears waivers

[Mike] Rivera, the Brewers' No. 3 catcher, cleared waivers and was sent to Class AAA Nashville on Tuesday. The Brewers had feared losing Rivera to a waiver claim.

A week earlier, JD Closser cleared waivers and was sent to Nashville, although he has remained in the big-league camp.
...
Third baseman Corey Koskie returned to Minnesota to continue physical therapy in an effort to recover from post-concussion syndrome. Yost said it was too frustrating for Koskie to remain with the team until the end of camp.

Do the Brewers need a backup 3B? Too bad they the Sox couldn't have traded Mack there for a C + something else and kept Perez. Alas.

by hitlesswonder on Mar 27, 2007 11:34 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Retarded...

If Kenny had a chance to claim Mike Rivera and didn't, he should be ripped for it. Rivera would have been light-years better than Gustavo Molina. Not that Spring Training stats mean anything but Rivera had a .415/.415/.610/.1025 in 41 at bats.

by SSH2005 on Mar 27, 2007 11:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Rivera

Was with the Sox before, so maybe there's something they didn't like about him. Who knows...

by hitlesswonder on Mar 27, 2007 11:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

You know...

I'm to the point where I just want to stop worrying about all the moves. I never seem to agree with most of the moves made by the team even going back to the championship season. There is such a premium put on these "grinderish" intangible qualities that actual results matter little.

After a week straight of worrying and stressing...I'm just going to wait for the season to start and see how things work out. We're just going to have to accept things like the fact that Brian Anderson will become the new Ross Gload. A guy who we all want to see getting more playing time but who will be lucky to see the plate more than once every ten games. Ozzie will always make bizzare moves that make no sense to anyone but him...so I guess we just have to live with it. Just brace yourself for a few games where Ozuna is given the outfield start over Brian.

AIM: BrentBrookhouse http://www.badlefthook.com - a part of the SportsBlog Nation Family

by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 28, 2007 8:38 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Ironic since Gload is now due for a lot more AB's.

Manager Buddy Bell said Tuesday that he plans to platoon Emil Brown and Ross Gload in left field.
A strict platoon would leave the lefty-hitting Gload with most of the at-bats, but it's unclear if that'll happen. Whatever the case, Brown wasn't happy with the news. "I don't have a reaction to it," Brown said. "What am I going to do about it?"

Source: Kansas City Star

by SSH2005 on Mar 28, 2007 8:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Platooning Gload in left

what a strange idea...

by chrome on Mar 28, 2007 1:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Why do that...

When you can have Scott Podsednik tiptoe around in the outfield and generate outs on the basepaths instead?

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Mar 28, 2007 1:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

True. Gload would just clog the bases up

with a good OBP and an ability to hit lefties....

by chrome on Mar 28, 2007 2:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

But at least Ozzie will

replace Ozuna in LF with BA in late innings, won't he? Or move Erstud to left and put BA in center?

I'm just very happy he made the team. Now I'm hoping he hits lights-out, and forces his way into more than a caddy role.

It should be called Bill Veeck Park!

by Chiburb on Mar 28, 2007 9:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Man, Scott Hairston would look awesome...

on our team and starting in LF right about now.

He hit 3 homers in 2 innings (4 and 5) a game yesterday, all against Josh Fogg. He has 6 homers on the Spring.

by SSH2005 on Mar 28, 2007 9:59 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

the good news

when Erstad goes down with an injury, BA will be right there to step in.

Go Badgers!

by shaftr on Mar 28, 2007 10:15 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I suspect...

That Brian Anderson will be in the lineup half the time anyway while Scott Podsednik nurses his various owies.

I'm hoping that Ryan Sweeney breaks through this year and is ready to play ASAP, because Peter Pan and Tinkerbell are going to wear out the disabled list.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Mar 28, 2007 11:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ozzie's boy Ugueth Urbina gets 14 years in jail...

Urbina sentenced to prison in Venezuela

by SSH2005 on Mar 28, 2007 11:05 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Hmm

I just think that BA will find a starting role in the first or two month of the season. Maybe Ozzie is trying to light a spark under him, or maybe Ozzie don't need no stinking statistics. But the White Sox organization is not dumb. A replacement will be made if BA continues to play well.

by quartz77277 on Mar 28, 2007 12:03 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Doubtful

I saw this in ChicagoSports - it leads me to believe BA was not Ozzie's choice:

But Gustavo Molina has won the backup catcher's job and Brian Anderson will be the backup center fielder despite Guillen's acknowledgement Anderson should have started the season at Triple-A Charlotte to be assured of more playing time.

by Brush Back on Mar 28, 2007 12:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

good

someone needs to knock some sense into him.of course, that means petulant ozzie may not play BA.

by larry on Mar 28, 2007 12:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Like I said...

With as brittle as Podsednik and Erstad are, I have no doubt that Anderson will get plenty of PT, whether Ozzie wills it or no.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Mar 28, 2007 12:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

It would help

to be a fly on the wall in a meeting between Ozzie, KW, et al. when Anderson is discussed to understand what's really going on. All you need is to watch him go after a few fly balls (gazelle-like) to know he's a CF.

Also I wish they took a poll of the 11 Sox pitchers coming North to decide who the regular CF should be. I'd take my chances!!

by ballyb on Mar 28, 2007 12:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think Williams likes Anderson

Last season when Anderson was really sucking the Sox had a management meeting to decide what to do. Leading up to that meeting, IIRC, Ozzie really implied Anderson was headed to AAA. Afterward, they announced he would stay with the Sox. My impression was that Williams told Ozzie Anderson was staying with Sox. I wouldn't be surprised if something similar happened here.

Granted that's all guesswork, but we are on the internet after all. We're supposed to rumormonger and post unreliable info.

by hitlesswonder on Mar 28, 2007 1:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's what I've been thinking too

KW, being a former CF himself, may see Anderson the way (most of) we do: +D, and at least average offensive potential.
I remember KW winning the Chicago Rookie of the Year award, and in his speech giving all credit to Fregosi (his manager)for this simple advice: "Stay small". Which KW explained meant don't swing for the fences, just make good contact and play solid D, and the good things will happen.
I can see KW saying the same to BA, and hoping for the best. Despite Ozzie.

It should be called Bill Veeck Park!

by Chiburb on Mar 28, 2007 2:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

prodigious memory

I can only comprehend the BA moves in a context of trading him. Ozzie does not want him around and Kenny is afraid if he goes back down he somehow loses value for trading purposes. He's they guy they throw in to get a deal done.

I love watchng him play centerfield and I suspect he will do so somewhere else for 10 years

by dyspeptic on Mar 30, 2007 2:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

CC

Sabathia was hit by a line drive in his pitching wrist and came out after the first batter

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070328&content_id=1863204&vkey=spt2007news&fex t=.jsp

by bhoov on Mar 28, 2007 1:12 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I just heard on 670

baseball prospectus think the sox might go after javy as the backup catcher around the beginning of may

by Option27 on Mar 28, 2007 1:22 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Why

May? What's wrong with now?

by dantesox on Mar 28, 2007 1:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i would imagine neither side

is particularly interested in committing if toby does come back. javy wants playing time, likely in one place this season, and we don't want to waste $700,000 on a guy who will play only a couple months for us.

by larry on Mar 28, 2007 2:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

They want to see...

what happens with Hall first. If the rehab doesn't work out and he needs the surgery, the Sox are going to HAVE to make a move. But going after somebody now that would have to clear waivers in about a month doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

by CWSKeith on Mar 28, 2007 2:05 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I

certainly hear your point along with Larry's. However, even a budget conscious team must recognize the damage 1-2 months with Molina as a backup can cost...isn't it worth 700,000 even if for that amount of time....and, realistically, Probably a whole year. We're talking Javy Lopez at 700K, not Mike Piazza at 3-4 million.

by dantesox on Mar 28, 2007 2:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Since when...

does Baseball Prospectus have an insider's view of the Sox front office, anyway? They're just making something up.

Javier Lopez will not be on the White Sox.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Mar 28, 2007 2:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i think it's more javy

the guy wants to play a lot in one spot. he's willing (and able) to wait and see - he doesn't want to play here for a couple months and then find out he has to search for another employer. also, it's a near certainty that another team will lose a catcher - and that situation may be a much better for him than us.

by larry on Mar 28, 2007 2:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I

think you're right....but I'd still try and lure him our way. I'm not high on his defense, which is bad, but would like to see him vs. all this left-handed pitching.

by dantesox on Mar 28, 2007 2:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

my guess is that there has been contact

but javy has made his demands pretty clear - and he can stick to them. we don't quite fit right now. fingers crossed he's still available in 3-4 weeks when we reassess toby.

by larry on Mar 28, 2007 2:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs